TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court to conclude that bail petitioner purchased the aforesaid drugs for indulging in illegal trade of the same. The Court sees no reason to keep the bail petitioner in jail for an indefinite period, especially, when he has already suffered for more than seven months. Needless to say, guilt, if any, of the petitioner is yet to be proved in accordance with law and as such, his freedom cannot be ordered to curtailed for an indefinite period during the pendency of the trial. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail - Petition allowed. - Cr. MP(M) No.1502 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 27-12-2017 - Hon ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma For the Petitioner : Mr. H.S.Rana, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Vikram Thakur, Deputy Advocate General ORDER Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): By way of instant bail petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.PC, a prayer has been made on behalf of the applicant/bail petitioner for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 103/17 dated 22.5.2017, under Section 21-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (In short the NDPS Act ) and Section 18 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, registered at P.S. Nalagarh, District Sol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where, it can be inferred that in the event of bail petitioner s being enlarged on bail, he may flee from the justice. 4. Mr. Vikram Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, while opposing the aforesaid prayer having been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that keeping in view the gravity of offence allegedly committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Though, Mr. Thakur, fairly conceded that during investigation, it has come that drugs/psychotropic substance was purchased from JMD Pharmaceuticals by the bail petitioner on the strength of his licence, but contended that same was not meant for purchase of prohibited drugs i.e. Codiene, Dextropropoxyphene, Diphenoxylate, Nitrazepam, Pentazocine and Buprinorphine and theirsalts, rather same was for purchase and sale of surgical and medical devices, veterinary, OTC medicines and Lab Reagents. Lastly, Mr. Thakur, contended that since prohibited drugs/contraband was recovered from the vehicle occupied by the bail petitioner and as such, possibility of his involvement in the alleged crime i.e. illegal trade of prohibited drugs, with other co-accused cannot be ruled out and as suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tage, there is nothing on record, which could compel this Court to conclude that bail petitioner purchased the aforesaid drugs for indulging in illegal trade of the same. Otherwise also, if report submitted by the FSL, Junga, is perused and considered, it clearly suggests that save and except, 500 bottles of Elturex- T Cough Syrup, other drugs namely tramadex capsules were not found to be psychotropic substance as defined under the NDPS Act. Report submitted by FSL further reveals that 196.5 mg, codeine phosphate was found in one bottle of 100ml, meaning thereby, if aforesaid quantity is taken into consideration qua 500 bottles recovered from the vehicle being driven by the petitioner, total quantity comes out to be less than small quantity i.e. 9.56 mg and as such, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are not attracted. 8. Accordingly, this Court after having carefully perused report/record, submitted by the FSL Junga, sees no reason to keep the bail petitioner in jail for an indefinite period, especially, when he has already suffered for more than seven months. Needless to say, guilt, if any, of the petitioner is yet to be proved in accordance with law and as such, his freedom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o an unconvicted person for the propose of giving him a taste of imprisonment as a lesson. 11. In Manoranjana Sinh Alias Gupta versus CBI 2017 (5) SCC 218, The Hon ble Apex Court has held as under:- This Court in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, also involving an economic offence of formidable magnitude, while dealing with the issue of grant of bail, had observed that deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment unless it is required to ensure that an accused person would stand his trial when called upon and that the courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried ad found guilty. It was underlined that the object of bail is neither punitive or preventive. This Court sounded a caveat that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper for any court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of a conduct whether an accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an unconvicted person for the purpose of giving him to taste of imprisonment as a lesson. It was enunciated that since the jurisdiction to grant bail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
